militarywikiaorg-20200222-history
Battle of the Denmark Strait
firing at on 24 May 1941 |partof = World War II |date = 24 May 1941 |place = Denmark Strait |result = German victory Bismarck aborts mission |combatant1 = Germany |combatant2 = |commander1 = Günther Lütjens Ernst Lindemann Helmuth Brinkmann |commander2 = Lancelot Holland John Leach Ralph Kerr Frederic Wake-Walker |strength1 = One battleship One heavy cruiser |strength2 =One battleship One battlecruiser Two heavy cruisers |casualties1 =One battleship damaged |casualties2 =One battlecruiser sunk One battleship damaged 1,428 dead Nine wounded |campaignbox = }} The Battle of the Denmark Strait was a Second World War naval battle between ships of the Royal Navy and the German Kriegsmarine, fought on 24 May 1941. The British battleship and the battlecruiser fought the German battleship and the heavy cruiser , both of which were attempting to break out into the North Atlantic to attack Allied merchant shipping. Less than 10 minutes after the British opened fire, a shell from Bismarck struck Hood near her aft ammunition magazines. Soon afterward, Hood exploded, and sank within three minutes with the loss of all but three of her crew. Prince of Wales continued to exchange fire with Bismarck but suffered serious malfunctions in her main armament as the British battleship had not fully worked up after only being completed in late March 1941 and soon broke off the engagement. The battle was considered a tactical victory for the Germans; however, Bismarck was forced to abort her Atlantic mission due to damage suffered to her forward fuel tanks, and was eventually sunk herself three days later. Background The two ships were expected to try to break westward through the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap. While passing neutral Sweden in the Baltic Sea, they were first spotted by the Swedish cruiser and patrol planes from the neutral country;Dr. Mann, Chris (2008). Great Battles of World War II. Bath: Parragon Books Ltd. P60 these reports were intercepted by the British embassy, allowing Royal Navy ships to watch their probable route. Due to cloud and rain, aircraft scheduled to assist in the search, could not do so when the German ships attempted their breakout.Barnett 1991, p. 288. On the evening of 23 May, despite the advantage of foul weather to cloak their presence, the Germans were spotted, steaming at , by the British heavy cruisers and . These cruisers - each carrying eight 8-inch guns - were patrolling the Denmark Strait under the command of Rear-Admiral Frederic Wake-Walker. With the help of Suffolk s newly installed radar, the cruisers shadowed the German ships through the night, reporting on their movements. The next morning, the German ships were intercepted in the Strait between Iceland and Greenland by a force of British ships. These were the battleship Prince of Wales, the battlecruiser and a screen of six destroyers, , ''Acates'', ''Antelope'', ''Anthony'', ''Echo'' and ''Icarus''.|group=nb}} under the command of Vice-Admiral Lancelot Holland in Hood. Prince of Wales was a newly commissioned ''King George V''-class battleship, of much the same size and power as Bismarck. She had not yet been properly "shaken down", and her crew was green. She still had mechanical problems, especially with her main armament, and had sailed with shipyard workers still aboard working on her. Hood, following her commissioning in 1918, had been the largest warship afloat for 20 years. Between the wars, more than any other ship, she had represented British naval power in the eyes of Britain and the world. But her armour was less comprehensive than a battleship's and her lower armoured deck was too light to stand up to long-range plunging fire. The outbreak of World War II prevented her from undergoing the required modernisation, specifically a planned increase in the thickness of the lower deck from to . Even so, Hood s firepower, eight guns, was the equal of any German ship afloat. Far away to the southeast, Admiral Holland's superior, Admiral Sir John Tovey debated whether to order Admiral Holland to allow Prince of Wales ahead of Hood. In this position, the better-protected Prince of Wales would draw the enemy's fire. He decided not to give this order, later claiming, "I did not feel such interference with such a senior officer justified."Kennedy 1974, p. 66. Plan gone awry Holland's battle plan was to have Hood and Prince of Wales engage Bismarck while Suffolk and Norfolk engaged Prinz Eugen (which, Holland assumed, still steamed behind Bismarck and not ahead of her). He signalled this to Captain John C. Leach of Prince of Wales''Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 140. but did not radio Rear Admiral Wake-Walker, who as Commander of the 1st Cruiser Squadron directed ''Suffolk and Norfolk, for fear of disclosing his location. Instead, he observed radio silence. Holland hoped to meet the enemy at approximately 02:00. Sunset in this latitude was at 01:51 (ship's clocks were four hours ahead of local timeKennedy 1974, p. 108). Bismarck and Prinz Eugen would be silhouetted against the sun's afterglow while Hood and Prince of Wales could approach rapidly, unseen in the darkness, to a range close enough not to endanger Hood with plunging fire from Bismarck.Chesneau 2002, p. 151 The Germans would not expect an attack from this quarter, giving the British the advantage of surprise. The plan's success depended on Suffolk s continually unbroken contact with the German ships. However, Suffolk lost contact from 00:28. For 90 minutes, Holland neither sighted the German ships nor received any further news from Norfolk or Suffolk. Reluctantly, he ordered Hood and Prince of Wales to turn south-southwest while the destroyers continued searching to the north. Before contact was re-established, the two squadrons missed each other by a hairsbreadth. Had the German ships not altered course to the west at 01:41 to follow the line of the Greenland icepack, the British would have intercepted them much earlier than they did. The British destroyers were just to the southeast when the Germans made this course change. If the visibility had not been reduced to , the German vessels would probably have been spotted.Kennedy 2004, pp. 70–71. Just before 03:00, Suffolk regained contact with Bismarck. Hood and Prince of Wales were away, slightly ahead of the Germans. Holland signalled to steer toward the Germans and increased speed to . Suffolk s loss of contact had placed the British at a disadvantage. Instead of the swiftly closing head-on approach Holland had envisioned, he would have to converge at a wider angle, much more slowly. This would leave Hood vulnerable to Bismarck s plunging shells for a much longer period. The situation worsened further when, at 03:20, Suffolk reported that the Germans had made a further course alteration to the west, placing the German and British squadrons almost abeam of each other. At 05:35, lookouts on Prince of Wales spotted the German ships away. The Germans, already alerted to the British presence through their hydrophonic equipment, picked up the smoke and masts of the British ships 10 minutes later. At this point, Holland had the option of joining Suffolk in shadowing Bismarck and waiting for Tovey to arrive with King George V and other ships to attack or to order his squadron into action. He chose the latter at 05:37.Boyne 1995, p. 59. The rough seas in the Strait kept the destroyers' role to a minimum and the cruisers Norfolk and Suffolk would be too far behind the German force to reach the battle. The battle begins Hood opened fire at 05:52 at a distance of approximately . Holland had ordered firing on the leading ship, Prinz Eugen, believing from her position that she was Bismarck. Holland soon amended his order and directed both ships to engage the rear ship, Bismarck. Prince of Wales had already correctly identified and targeted Bismarck, whereas Hood is believed to have continued to fire at Prinz Eugen for some time. Holland, himself a gunnery expert, was well aware of the danger posed by Hood s weak horizontal protection. Therefore, he wanted to reduce the range as quickly as possible. At a shorter range, the trajectory of Bismarck s shells would be flatter and they would be more likely to hit the sides of the ship rather than the decking, or to glance off the top deck. However, he closed the range at an angle that placed the German ships too far forward of the beam. This meant he could use only 10 of his capital ships' 18 heavy guns while presenting the Germans more at which to aim than necessary. Those 10 guns became nine when a defect in one of Prince of Wales forward guns rendered it inoperative after the first salvo.Barnett 1991, p. 292. Both Suffolk and Norfolk attempted to engage Bismarck during the action, but both were out of range and neither cruiser had a sufficient speed advantage over Bismarck to rapidly close the range during the brief engagement.Bonomi, The Battle of the Denmark Strait''Naval Staff History, ''German Capital Ships and Raiders in WW2, Battle Summary No. 5, p8. The Germans also had the weather gauge, meaning that the British ships were steaming into the wind, spray drenching the lenses of Prince of Wales "A" turret' Barr and Stroud coincidence rangefinder and both British ships' "B" turret rangefinders. This necessitated using the shorter based ( ) ones in the director towers instead. In addition, Admiral Holland had Prince of Wales stay close to Hood, conforming to Hood s movements instead of varying course and speed. This made it easier for the Germans to find the range to both British ships, although it would have aided Holland's gunners if they had both fired upon Bismarck as originally planned, since they could then precisely time each other's salvos to avoid mistaking one ship's fire for the other. They could also use Concentration Fire, where both ships' main armament salvos would be controlled by one ship's fire control computer - probably Prince of Wales' modern Admiralty Fire Control Table. Prince of Wales struck her target first. She would ultimately hit Bismarck three times. One shell struck the commander's boat and put the seaplane catapult amidships out of action (the latter damage not being discovered until much later, during an attempt to fly off the ship's War Diary on the eve of her final battle). The second shell passed through the bow from one side to the other without exploding. The third struck the hull underwater and burst inside the ship, flooding a generator room and damaging the bulkhead to an adjoining boiler room, partially flooding it. These last two hits caused damage to Bismarck s machinery and medium flooding.Garzke and Dulin, Bismarck's Final Battle, part 1. More importantly, the damage to the bow cut access to of fuel oil in the forward fuel tanks. It also caused Bismarck to leave a visible oil slick and reduced her speed by . Bismarck was soon listing 9° to port and lost of freeboard at her bow. The Germans held their fire until 05:55, when both German ships targeted Hood. Admiral Lutjens, the German fleet chief and task force commander, did not immediately give the order to commence firing. Not until he had made multiple inquiries did Bismarck s first gunnery officer Korvettenkapitän Adalbert Schneider, " "? (Permission to open fire?); the commander of Bismarck, '' ''Kapitän zur See Ernst Lindemann, impatiently responded: " " (I'm not letting my ship get shot out from under my arse. Open fire!) Grützner 2010, p. 180. A shell hit ''Hood s boat deck, starting a sizable fire in the ready-use ammunition stored there, but this fire did not spread to other areas of the ship or cause the later explosion. Although unconfirmed, it is possible that Hood was struck again at the base of her bridge and in her foretop radar director. There has been some contention over which German vessel struck Hood at this time. Prinz Eugen, under the command of Kapitän zur See Helmuth Brinkmann, was targeting Prince of Wales by this stage, following an order from the fleet commander.Rico, Operation Rheinübung see sections, Jot! Dora and The Destruction of the Hood. www.kbismarck.com However, Prinz Eugen s Gunnery Officer, Paul Schmalenbach is quoted as confirming that Prinz Eugen's target was Hood.Chesneau 2002, p. 156. Sinking of Hood (commanding HMS Prince of Wales) for the 2nd Board of Enquiry, 1941. The sketch represents the column of smoke or flame that erupted from the vicinity of the mainmast immediately before a huge detonation which obliterated from view the after part of the ship. This phenomenon is believed to have been the result of a cordite fire venting through the engine-room ventilators (see article).]] At 06:00, Holland ordered his force to turn once again to port to ensure that the aft main guns on both Hood and Prince of Wales could bear on the German ships. During the execution of that turn, a salvo from Bismarck, fired at a range of about , was seen by men aboard Prince of Wales to straddle Hood abreast her mainmast. It is likely that one shell struck somewhere between Hood s mainmast and "X" turret aft of the mast. This was immediately followed by a huge pillar of flame that shot upward like a giant blowtorch, in the vicinity of the mainmast. This was followed by an explosion that destroyed a large portion of the ship from amidships clear to the rear of "Y" turret. The ship broke in two. The stern fell away and sank. The bow, pointed upward and pivoting about, followed shortly thereafter. The forward turret did manage to fire one last salvo while upward, possibly from the doomed gun crew, just before the bow section sank. Splinters rained down on Prince of Wales away. Hood sank in about three minutes, taking 1,415 men, including Vice-Admiral Holland, with her. Only three of her crew (Ted Briggs, Bob Tilburn and Bill Dundas), survived to be rescued two hours later by the destroyer HMS Electra. The British Admiralty later concluded that the most likely explanation for the loss of Hood was a penetration of her magazines by a single shell from Bismarck, causing the subsequent catastrophic explosion. Recent research by submersible craft suggests that the initial explosion was in the aft magazine and that it spread to the magazines via the ammunition trunks. It has been suggested from examination of the wreckage, found in 2001, that the magazine explosion in the armament near the mainmast caused the vertical blast of flame seen there, and this in turn ignited the magazines of the aft guns that caused the explosion that wrecked the stern. This explosion might have travelled through the starboard fuel tanks, igniting the fuel oil there, setting off the forward magazines and completing the destruction of the ship. The wreck of Hood revealed the bow section bereft of any structure and a huge section of her side is missing, from the 'A' barbette to the foredeck. The midship section had its plates curled outward. Moreover, the main parts of the forward structure, including the conning tower, were found about away from the main wreckage.Sonar image of the wreck site This has sparked theories that the forward magazines exploded as a result of the force, flames and pressure, caused by the detonation of the aft magazines.Chesneau 2002, p. 178-179 However, a team of marine forensic scientists has found that implosion damage to the forward hull due to the rapid sinking of the Hood, is the most likely cause of the state of the forward hull, and they do not support any theory that the forward magazines exploded.[http://legacy.sname.org/committees/design/mfp/website/recent/research/hood_bismarck_1.pdf Jurens, Garzke, Dulin, Roberts (V),Fiske, A MARINE FORENSIC ANALYSIS of HMS Hood and DKM Bismarck] ''Prince of Wales'' alone Prince of Wales found herself steering towards the sinking Hood. Her commanding officer, Captain Leach, ordered an emergency avoidance turn away from Hood s wreckage. This violent change of course disrupted her aim and put her in a position that made it easier for the Germans to target her. She resumed her previous course, but was now under the concentrated fire of both German ships. Prince of Wales was struck four times by Bismarck and three times by Prinz Eugen. One shell passed through her upper superstructure, killing or wounding several crewmen in the Compass Platform and Air Defence Platform. Pieces of another shell struck her radar office aft, killing the crewmen within. An shell from Prinz Eugen found its way to the propelling charge/round manipulation chamber below the aft gun turrets, and a shell from Bismarck hit underwater below the armour belt, penetrating about into the ship's hull, about below the waterline, but was stopped by the anti-torpedo bulkhead. Fortunately for Prince of Wales, neither shell exploded, but she still suffered minor flooding and the loss of some fuel oil. Contrary to some mistaken opinion, the shell that struck Prince of Wales below the waterline did not endanger her magazines, as it came to rest abreast an auxiliary machinery room.Garzke and Dulin, p.181 By this time, serious gunnery malfunctions had caused intermittent problems with the main armament, leading to a 26% reduction in output. Problems in Prince of Wales turrets during her first action against Bismarck, according to her Gunnery Aspects Report: "A" Turret: No. 1 gun failed after the 1st salvo, from a previously known defect. No. 2 and No. 4 guns suffered from intermittent safety interlock problems. "A" turret suffered from water entering the lower portion of the turret/barbette structure, but there is no indication that this caused any problems other than discomfort for the crew. At Salvo 18, when Prince of Wales turned away, three of 'A' turret's guns were in operation. "B" Turret: No problems reported. At Salvo 18, when Prince of Wales turned away, both of 'B' turrets guns were in operation. "Y" Turret No.2 gun had loading problems and missed salvo 14 onwards. No.3 gun had problems with safety interlocks causing it to miss salvos 15 to 20. At salvo 18, when Prince of Wales turned away, two of "Y" turrets guns were in operation. "Y" turrets shell transfer ring jammed at salvo 20, due to a shell sliding out of its tray due to the motion of the ship as Prince of Wales turned. In summary, three guns in "A" turret, two guns in "B" turret, and two guns in "Y" turret, were in operation at salvo 18 when Prince of wales turned away, for a total of seven guns in operation.|group=nb}} Captain Leach realised that continuing the action would risk losing Prince of Wales without inflicting further damage on the enemy. He therefore ordered the ship to make smoke and withdraw, 'pending a more favourable opportunity'.Chesneau 2004, p.11 Prince of Wales turned away just after 06:04, firing from her rear turret under local control until the turret suffered a jammed shell ring, cutting off the ammunition supply and making the guns inoperable. Despite efforts by crew members and civilian technicians to repair the shell ring, all four guns were not back in service until 08:25, although two of the four guns were serviceable by 07:20. This temporarily left only fiveBennett 2003, p.141Roskill, The War at Sea, Vol 1, p406. guns operational, but nine of the ten were operational in five hours.Garzke and Dulin, 1980. p. 190. The final salvos fired were ragged and are believed to have fallen short.Barnett 2004, p. 294. The ship retired from the battle around 06:10. Thirteen of her crew had been killed, nine were wounded.Tarrant 1991, p. 58. The timing of Prince of Wales withdrawal was fortunate for her, as she had come into torpedo range of Prinz Eugen and turned away as the German cruiser was about to fire.Kennedy 2004, p. 89. Breaking off the action On Bismarck, there was tremendous elation at the sinking of Hood. There was also a keen expectation that they would close on Prince of Wales and possibly finish her off. Bismarck s captain, Ernst Lindemann, requested that Admiral Lütjens allow Bismarck to do just that. Captain Lindemann was a master naval gunner and knew he had Prince of Wales at his mercy. Even if British Admiral John Tovey's squadron had left Scapa Flow the previous day, he would still be more than away from Bismarck even after diverting to sink Prince of Wales — a chase Lindemann calculated would take only two or three hours.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, pp. 165–166. Lütjens refused to allow Lindemann to give chase, giving no explanation. Lindemann repeated his request, this time more assertively.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 166. Lütjens held firm to orders from the German Naval Commander, Groß Admiral Erich Raeder, to avoid unnecessary combat with the Royal Navy, especially when it could lead to further damage that could hasten delivering Bismarck toward the waiting hands of the British. He broke off combat instead of pursuing Prince of Wales''Barnett 2004, p. 295. and ordered a course of 270°, due west. ''Bismarck had fired 93 of her 353 base-fused Armour Piercing (AP) shells during the engagement.Bismarck's armament. This clash between the two senior German officers reflected their disparate and distinct command functions. As commander of Bismarck, Lindemann operated first and foremost as a tactician. As such, he had no doubt about his ship's immediate objective to destroy Prince of Wales, and he had pressed his case as far and hard as he should. Lütjens, as fleet chief and task force commander, operated at the strategic and operational levels. To some degree, his orders were clear – attacking convoys was his priority, not risking "a major engagement for limited, and perhaps uncertain, goals". Nevertheless, Raeder had also ordered Lütjens to be bold and imaginative, to accept battle if unavoidable and conduct it vigorously to the finish.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, pp. 166–167. The reality was that Lütjens' orders did not cover a spectacular success like the one just achieved. His priority therefore was to stick to his instructions, focus on sinking merchant shipping and avoid encounters with enemy warships whenever possible. Moreover, before leaving Germany, Lütjens had told Admirals Conrad Patzig and Wilhelm Marschall, that he would adhere to Raeder's directives. This meant he did not intend to become the third fleet chief to be relieved for contradicting Raeder's orders; Marschall, one of his two predecessors, had been relieved of command for not following his orders to the letter despite the fact that Marschall's analysis of the changes in the tactical situation since the orders were issued resulted in the sinking of the British aircraft carrier and its two escorting destroyers. Nor was he predisposed to discuss his command decisions with a subordinate officer. Even if he had known it was the untried Prince of Wales he was fighting and not King George V, Lütjens would probably have stuck to his decision. Following her would have meant exposing the squadron to further gunfire as well as to torpedo attacks from Norfolk and Suffolk. He would have risked his ships and crews on an expressly forbidden opportunity.Kennedy, 98. Between 06:19 and 06:25, Suffolk fired six salvoes in the direction of Bismarck, having mistaken a radar contact with an aircraft for Bismarck. Suffolk was actually out of gun range of both Bismarck and Prinz Eugen at the time.Dewar, p.8 Aftermath With Vice-Admiral Holland's death, command of Prince of Wales as well as Norfolk and Suffolk fell to British Rear-Admiral Frederic Wake-Walker. With this command came the responsibility of coping with Bismarck until enough British warships could concentrate and destroy her. His choice was either to renew the action with the Bismarck or ensure that she be intercepted and brought to action by Admiral Tovey. Wake-Walker chose the latter course, continuing to shadow the German ships. Further action, he concluded, would cause more damage to Prince of Wales than to Bismarck and endanger his cruisers, plus he knew Tovey was on his way. He ordered Prince of Wales to follow Norfolk at her best speed, so that Norfolk could fall back on her if attacked. At 07:57 Suffolk reported that the Bismarck had reduced speed and appeared damaged.Barnett, 297–299. Since Bismarck s receiving the first hit in the forecastle, all six of the ship's 26-man damage control teams had worked ceaselessly to repair the damage. When it was reported that the tips of the starboard propeller could be seen above water, Lindemann had ordered counterflooding two compartments aft to restore the ship's trim. He then sent divers into the forecastle to connect the forward fuel tanks, containing a much-needed of fuel, first to the tanks near the forward boiler then to the rear fuel tank by way of a provisional line running over the upper deck. Both these manoeuvres failed. Lindemann then requested permission to slow Bismarck and heel the ship first to one side then the other to weld patches from the inside to the holes in the forward hull. Lütjens refused, again without comment. Eventually, the admiral had to agree to slow the ship to to allow hammocks and collision matting to be stuffed in the holes of the No. 2 boiler room and the auxiliary boiler room to stop the growing ingress of seawater. This attempt also failed. Boiler Room No. 2 was shut down, with a loss of speed to .Bercuson and Herwig 2001, pp. 169–70. As well as taking-on seawater, Bismarck was leaking fuel oil. Lütjens ordered Prinz Eugen to drop back and see how much of a trail she was leaving astern. The carpet of oil was broad enough to cover both sides of the ship's wake, was all colours of the rainbow and gave off a strong smell – all of which helped disclose Bismarck s location.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 173.Kennedy 2004, p. 99. The damage to Bismarck s forward fuel tanks, combined with a missed opportunity to refuel at Bergen earlier in the voyage, left less than of fuel remaining, not enough to operate effectively against the Atlantic convoys. Also, the element of surprise – which was considered essential for the operation's success – had most definitely been lost; the squadron also continued to be shadowed by Suffolk, Norfolk and eventually also Prince of Wales.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 170. Lütjens concluded that he needed to abort Bismarck s mission and head toward a convenient dockyard for repairs. The question was which dockyard to head for. The nearest friendly ports were Bergen and Trondheim in Norway, a little over away. Steaming in that direction meant a return passage north or south of Iceland, with the enemy's air forces now fully alerted to their presence and the possibility of other heavy units between them and Scapa Flow. Lütjens also knew his intelligence was unreliable. Hood had been reported by Group North to be off West Africa and there had been no reports of a King George V-class battleship in the vicinity.Kennedy 2004, p. 100. Disregarding Lindemann's recommendation to return to Bergen,Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 172. Lütjens ordered Bismarck to head for the French port of Saint-Nazaire. Although the French coast was further away than Bergen, Saint-Nazaire held the potential of longer nights and wider seas in which to shake off Bismarck s shadowers, plus the possibility of luring them across a line of U-boats. It would also leave Bismarck poised on the edge of the British trade routes once the damage were repaired; it also meant the potential support of the battleships and , as well. Both ships had been stationed at Brest in France, since the end of Operation Berlin earlier that year but had been kept in port for repairs and overhaul. While Brest was closer than Saint-Nazaire, it was also within range of Royal Air Force bombers.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 171. Lütjens detached the undamaged Prinz Eugen to continue raiding on her own. The cruiser went further south into the Atlantic, where she refueled from a tanker at sea. She suffered engine trouble, abandoned her commerce raiding mission without having sunk any merchant ships, and returned to Brest. Reaction German News of Lütjens' decision hit Berlin, Wilhelmshaven and Paris like a bolt from the blue. A blizzard of urgent telephone calls raced across German-occupied Europe. While the Berlin Admiralty was satisfied with Lütjens' success, it was tempered by news of Bismarck s damage and the decision to head for France. Grand Admiral Raeder was not clear whether Lütjens intended to steam for St. Nazaire immediately or after shaking off his pursuers and oiling in mid-Atlantic. Raeder immediately conferred with his chief of staff, Admiral Otto Schniewind, who in turn telephoned Admiral Rolf Carls, who commanded Group North in Wilhelmshaven. Carls had already drafted a message recalling Lütjens to Germany, but had not yet sent it. Schniewind pointed out that at noon Lütjens had crossed the demarcation line between the Northern Hebrides and Southern Greenland, thus passing from Group North's operational control to Group West; therefore, the decision to recall Lütjens was no longer Carls' to make. A subsequent call to Group West's commander, Admiral Alfred Saalwächter, revealed that he did not plan to recall Lütjens and that he felt such a decision should be discussed between Schniewind and Raeder.Kennedy 2004, pp. 100–101. Raeder was against issuing a recall himself, telling Schniewind they did not know enough about the situation at hand and that the person who would best know would be Lütjens.Kennedy 2004, p. 101. He then telephoned Adolf Hitler, who was at the Obersalzberg in the Bavarian Alps. Hitler received the news of Hood s sinking stoically, exhibiting neither joy nor any other triumphant behavior.Bercuson and Herwig 2001, p. 169. After hearing Raeder's report, he turned to those who were with him and expressed his personal thoughts: News of Hood s destruction was seized upon more enthusiastically by Dr. Joseph Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry. That evening it was broadcast to the nation, accompanied by "We march against England" and other martial airs. The German public, already enjoying the news of Luftwaffe victories over the Royal Navy off Crete, took Hood s sinking euphorically. British The British public were shocked that their most emblematic warship and more than 1,400 of her crew had been destroyed so suddenly. The Admiralty mobilised every available warship in the Atlantic to hunt down and destroy Bismarck. The Royal Navy forces pursued and brought Bismarck to battle; the German battleship was sunk on the morning of 27 May. Moves were subsequently made to court-martial Wake-Walker and Captain John Leach of Prince of Wales. The view was taken that they were wrong not to have continued the battle with Bismarck after Hood had been sunk. John Tovey, Commander-in-Chief of the Home Fleet, was appalled at this criticism. A row ensued between Tovey and his superior, Admiral Sir Dudley Pound. Tovey stated that the two officers had acted correctly, ensuring that the German ships were tracked and not endangering their ships needlessly. Furthermore, Prince of Wales s main guns had repeatedly malfunctioned and she could not have matched Bismarck. Tovey threatened to resign his position and appear at any court-martial as 'defendant's friend' and defence witness. No more was heard of the proposal. A British board of enquiry quickly investigated the cause of Hood s explosion and produced a report. After criticism that the initial enquiry did not record all the available evidence, a second board of enquiry more extensively investigated Hood s loss, and examined the vulnerabilities of other large British warships still in service in light of the probable causes of the explosion. It, like the first enquiry, concluded that a shell from Bismarck caused the explosion of Hood s aft ammunition magazines. This led to refitting some older British warships with increased protection for their ammunition magazines and some other related improvements. Many naval historians and writers have analyzed the Bismarck engagement and weighed the participants' decisions. One of the most debated is Admiral Lütjens' decision to proceed into the Atlantic rather than continue the battle. Parallels to Jutland A number of parallels could be drawn from Vice-Admiral Holland's actions in this battle and those of Admiral David Beatty in the opening stages of the Battle of Jutland. From his actions, it seems clear that Holland felt he had to engage Bismarck immediately, rather than support Wake-Walker in shadowing until Force 'H' could arrive. Beatty, likewise, felt he needed to engage German Admiral Franz Hipper's battlecruisers with his own forces instead of drawing the Germans toward Admiral John Jellicoe and the British Grand Fleet. Holland, like Beatty, possessed superiority in the number of heavy ships he possessed, yet he was encumbered by inferiority in fighting effectiveness of those units. Moreover, Holland's deployment of his units compared to Beatty's deployment at Jutland. Beatty and Holland both attacked while German units were well before the beam. As a result, the midships and after turrets of Beatty's ships could barely fire on the enemy; Holland's ships could not use their after turrets until the final turn to port just before Hood was sunk. Beatty placed his lighter-armoured battlecruisers at the head of his line, leaving the more powerful and better-armoured ''Queen Elizabeth''s in the rear. Likewise, Holland placed the old and vulnerable Hood ahead of the strongly armoured (albeit new and untested) Prince of Wales. Both admirals exercised tight tactical control over their units from their flagships. This prevented Captain Leach from manoeuvering Prince of Wales independently and possibly taking a different line of approach that could have confused the Germans. See also * Operation Rheinübung Sortie of Bismarck and Prinz Eugen References Footnotes Citations Bibliography * Adams, Simon. World War II. London: Dorling Kindersley Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-7894-6990-1 * Barnett, Correlli. Engage the enemy more closely: the Royal Navy in the Second World War. New York: W.W. Norton, 1991. ISBN 0-393-02918-2 * Bercuson, David J and Holger H. Herwig. The Destruction of the Bismarck. Woodstock and New York: The Overlook Press, 2001. ISBN 1-58567-192-4. * Bennett, Geoffrey. Naval Battles of WW2. Barnsley, South Yorkshire UK: Pen and Sword Books, 2003. ISBN 978-0-85052-989-0 * Bonomi, Antonio. "The Battle of the Denmark Strait", 2008. * Boyne, Walter J.. Clash of Titans: World War II at Sea. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. ISBN * Chesneau, Roger. Hood: Life and Death of a Battlecruiser. London: Cassell Publishing, 2002. ISBN 0-304-35980-7. * Dewar, A.D. Admiralty report BR 1736: The Chase and Sinking of the “Bismarck”. Naval Staff History (Second World War) Battle Summary No. 5, March 1950. Reproduced in facsimile in Grove, Eric (ed.), German Capital Ships and Raiders in World War II. Volume I: From “Graf Spee” to “Bismarck”, 1939–1941. London: Frank Cass Publishers 2002. ISBN 0-7146-5208-3 * Garzke, William H and Dulin, Robert O. Allied Battleships in World War II. United States Naval Institute, 1980. ISBN 0-87021-100-5. * Grützner, Jens (2010) (in German). Kapitän zur See Ernst Lindemann: Der Bismarck-Kommandant – Eine Biographie. VDM Heinz Nickel. ISBN 978-3-86619-047-4. * Kennedy, Ludovic, Pursuit: The Chase and Sinking of the Bismarck. New York: The Viking Press, 1974. ISBN 0-670-58314-6 * Kennedy, Ludovic Pursuit: The Chase and Sinking of the "Bismarck". London: Cassell Military Paperbacks, 2004. ISBN 0-304-35526-7 * Storia Militare, La battaglia dello Stretto di Danimarca, 2005 * Schofield, B.B. Loss of the Bismarck (Sea Battles in Close-Up). London: Ian Allen Ltd. 1972. * Tarrant, V E. King George V Class Battleships. London: Arms and Armour Press, 1991. ISBN 1-85409-524-2. Further reading * Robert Winklareth The Battle of the Denmark Strait: A Critical Analysis of the Bismarck's Singular Triumph Casemate Publishers External links * HMS Hood Association: Battle of the Denmark Strait Documentation Resource * The Battleship Bismarck * The Heavy Cruiser Prinz Eugen * The Sinking of the Bismarck, Official Despatch * Captain Leach's statement regarding the decision to end the action * Antonio Bonomi's reconstruction of the battle Category:Operation Rheinübung Category:Naval battles and operations of the European theatre of World War II Category:Naval battles of World War II involving Germany Category:Naval battles of World War II involving the United Kingdom